gnuckols follow up article

[atb5161]

Thread from a few months ago...

Follow up article...

I always enjoy the discussion between folks here and Greg.

Thoughts?

[OBoile]

I'm admitting to glossing over the article, but he seems to have an implicit change in stance.

I don't think he changed his stance at all. If anything, this appears to have reinforced it.

[krazyduck]

I found this about Greg on a different forum:

. . .the combination of

1) never had to struggle for strength
2) hyperfocus
3) the arrogance of the young, strong and uninjured

makes you have to filter his shit pretty hard.

[Adam Skillin]

I don't think he changed his stance at all. If anything, this appears to have reinforced it.

He appears to be making arguments about using the hamstrings concentrically in the squat. Is that something people advocate? Or is that just the common "squat-morning" mischaracterization of the model we advocate?

[Karl Schudt]

I don't squat to get my hamstrings strong, I squat to get me strong, and I don't care what percentage that strength is in my quads or my ass.

[tmcnulty]

Had me nodding along through the background and Pattern sections. Lost me here, in the first sentence of Technique:

This study lends even more support to the position that it’s not wise to purposefully squat in a way that increases hamstrings activation in the hole; in fact, it’s probably smart to purposefully minimize how much your hamstrings are doing as you start the ascent.

I don't see how this follows logically from the preceding analysis.

[Adam Skillin]

I don't see how this follows logically from the preceding analysis.

I've mentioned previously that I often have that problem with the articles Mr. Nuckols puts out. That doesn't mean it's not my own shortcoming that's causing my confusion. I hope we get to debate this, with or without Mr. Nuckols' input so that I can continue to expand my thinking on the matter.

That said, Karl's 100% on point.

[OBoile]

He appears to be making arguments about using the hamstrings concentrically in the squat. Is that something people advocate? Or is that just the common "squat-morning" mischaracterization of the model we advocate?

My understanding is that he's also advocating avoiding excessive use of the hamstrings through:
Not sitting back too much
Not leaning forward too much (both of these are kind of the same as sitting back more will result in more forward lean)

I don't think his comments are directed at any one type of squat form, but his advice of staying relatively upright does conflict with Rip's "nipples point to the ground" advice.

[Adam Skillin]

My understanding is that he's also advocating avoiding excessive use of the hamstrings through:
Not sitting back too much
Not leaning forward too much (both of these are kind of the same as sitting back more will result in more forward lean)

Is he talking about the actual model of the exercise or cueing the lifter though? Is this a rehash of the previous article, or the high-bar vs. low-bar one? I believe we debated both around here.

[OBoile]

Had me nodding along through the background and Pattern sections. Lost me here, in the first sentence of Technique:



I don't see how this follows logically from the preceding analysis.

How do you not see that?
Quads -> extend knee with no negative effect elsewhere
Glutes -> extend hips with no negative effect elsewhere
Hamstrings -> Extend hips, but actively work against quads

Thus, having glutes do most of the hip extension work instead of hamstrings results in the quads having an easier time which results in more weight lifted.